Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple CarPlay

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 376 posts

Re: Apple CarPlay

#291

Post by habosa »

Why do most car manufacturers insist on having a custom software suite for their cars? Every one I have tried is shittier than the last. Wouldn't they be better served installing a custom version of a well-known operating system? Windows 8, iOS, or Android in the car would be great. They could each have their own app store so that developers who do UX/UI for a living could make great apps for cars. It would have to be an improvement over what we have now.

CarPlay is a start, but I want something that doesn't require me to buy an iPhone and plug it in.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#292

Post by shas3 »

deveac wrote: post #272
GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

>Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. This reduces distraction. You have to remember to take into account human behavior. In the real world, people get into their vehicle and use their phone's map application, as well as text, phone, and m…

A good compromise on distractions and 'more inputs' is voice-based UI. Honestly, car companies and OEMs must be focusing on better voice-based UIs for cars rather than distracting touch screens. The Sync system in Ford cars is a well-intentioned example that doesn't work that well.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#293

Post by Shebanator »

jcromartie wrote: post #262
selectodude wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic transmissions have a clutch that's operated automatically. DSGs have two clutches for quicker gear changes. That's the only major difference.

Standard automatic transmissions don't have a clutch disc. They have a torque converter.

Virtually all modern automatic transmissions use a "lockup torque converter" for fuel efficiency. The lock-up clutch is activated once the transmission is fully coupled, and at that point the efficiency of the transmission is essentially identical to that of a manual transmission.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque_converter#Lock-up_torque...

Re: Apple CarPlay

#294

Post by r00fus »

fizz_and_buzz wrote: post #247
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

For some strange reason it is users in Europe that prefer manual transmission, since basically every car is available also with automatic transmission also. If anybody cares, here is my theory (at least for Germany, where I am from): Driving lessons are very expensive in Germany and you have to decide if you want to learn automatic or manual transmission. If you learn on automatic transmission, you are only allowed t…

> For some strange reason it is users in Europe that prefer manual transmission, since basically every car is available also with automatic transmission also.

The more likely cause is that gas in Europe is far far more expensive than it is here, and manual transmissions are historically more efficient than automatics (may have changed with hybrid e-CVT and newer drivetrains).

Also possibly an explanation is that engines in Europe are far smaller than here (to improve gas mileage) and manual transmissions gives the ability for a driver to play with the torque curve and delay shifts to improve immediate speed/responsiveness.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#295

Post by Shebanator »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #182
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

This is definitely a cultural difference. In many countries in Europe driving a car is considered a pleasure and a skill. Driving manual vs. automatic is considered the same as playing a guitar vs. playing Guitar Hero.

Well, car enthusiasts here in the US also consider driving a pleasure and a skill, and I too vastly prefer shifting myself when driving at speed. On the other hand, I find driving in heavy traffic with a manual transmission to be incredibly tedious. That's why a dual-clutch transmission is my favorite - manual performance and control when I want it, automatic convenience when I don't.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#296

Post by ed209 »

deveac wrote: post #272
GuiA wrote: post #34

Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. 1) Not only are touch screens a very poor interactor in the first place [0], but why do you think planes and other complex machinery have stuck with physical controls? For operating complex vehicles/app…

>Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. This reduces distraction. You have to remember to take into account human behavior. In the real world, people get into their vehicle and use their phone's map application, as well as text, phone, and m…

In 2011, 3,331 people were killed in crashes involving a distracted driver. 3,267 in 2010. [1]

When you say "This reduces distraction." you mean compared to holding the phone and doing those actions, right?

The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message? Even dictating a text message takes some cognitive load.

Let's not mix the word "safer" and "distracted driving".

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/

Re: Apple CarPlay

#297

Post by declan »

ekianjo wrote: post #76
archagon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think we'll have widespread self-driving cars — and not just the bare bones technology, but ones that we can ride in without any control at all, even while intoxicated — within a timespan short enough for every other advancement in car technology to not matter? I am almost 100% certain that we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever. Self-driving cars have way too many…

> I mean, Europe hasn't even moved over to automatic transmission yet. Haha. 1) Driving automatic cars is so boring. 2) it makes your body unbalanced constantly since you use a single foot, therefore your back will ache over long periods of driving. 3) You cannot adjust your speed as fast with an automatic car, we are stuck with binary controls while manual cars provide all the flexibility you need in real, and criti…

All but one of the cars I've owned have had a manual transmission, and I bought a 2013 GTS with a stick (even though the PDK-equipped model is faster 0-60, and certainly more fuel efficient).

But I reluctantly disagree with you. Almost all serious sports cars -- hardly "boring" -- now come with automatic transmissions: * All Ferraris are now automatic * All McLarens are now automatic * Porsche's top street car, the 911 Turbo S, is PDK-only * Porsche's top track-ready car, the 911 GT3, is PDK-only * The fastest hypercars, the LaFerrari, the McLaren P1, and the Porsche 918, are all automatic (I recall all 7-speed dual clutch)

Even Lotus, the one company you'd expect to keep the manual faith, on lightness grounds if nothing else, made the Evora available a few years ago with an automatic transmission. And Porsche has been quoted as saying the manual transmission may no longer be available after the 991 is phased out: http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012/02/porsche-911-manua...

Unfortunately manual transmissions now make the car slower. A stick is becoming an enthusiast's conceit, C&D's campaign notwithstanding, and I hope they're still offered, but I'm now considering a dual clutch automatic for my next car.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#298

Post by btown »

ed209 wrote: post #296
deveac wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yay, more touch screen in cars. More ways to distract, frustrate and confuse users who are operating a big box of steel weighing 3 tons and going at speeds the human brain has never evolved to appropriately deal with. This reduces distraction. You have to remember to take into account human behavior. In the real world, people get into their vehicle and use their phone's map application, as well as text, phone, and m…

In 2011, 3,331 people were killed in crashes involving a distracted driver. 3,267 in 2010. [1] When you say "This reduces distraction." you mean compared to holding the phone and doing those actions, right? The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message? Even dictating a text message…

If you intelligently disable in-car functionality (such as GPS when the car is moving), people will reach for another device to get that functionality. It's naive to think that constraints will automatically change users' desires.

Re: Apple CarPlay

#299

Post by eddieroger »

shimfish wrote: post #197
morganvachon wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think it's mirroring the phone's display onto the car's screen? That would be pointless, as you don't want dozens of irrelevant app icons cluttering your car's display. You want the basic controls that are useful in a car, with large targets that can be hit with a glance and later with muscle memory. If you really think they are just mirroring the display, then you didn't even look at the linked Apple p…

My guess is that the iOS SDK has been expanded to allow for a second screen that is output over lightning. So no, it's not mirroring the phone screen, but displaying another screen powered by the phone. This would seem to fit with it being iPhone5 and above only as lightning is designed to have these sorts of custom digital output.

Correct. At a minimum, it's a secondary display. But it's also deep integration into both ends over the Lightning cable (hence the iPhone 5 requirement).

Re: Apple CarPlay

#300

Post by ed209 »

btown wrote: post #298
ed209 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 2011, 3,331 people were killed in crashes involving a distracted driver. 3,267 in 2010. [1] When you say "This reduces distraction." you mean compared to holding the phone and doing those actions, right? The way I would account for human behavior is to intelligently disable certain functionality as the car is moving. Compared to someone else's life, how important is that text message? Even dictating a text message…

If you intelligently disable in-car functionality (such as GPS when the car is moving), people will reach for another device to get that functionality. It's naive to think that constraints will automatically change users' desires.

I believe Apple is sending out the wrong signal about driving+other activities at the same time.

Sure, people have already picked up bad habits, but that makes it ok to encourage that behavior if they are going to do it anyway?

Maybe Apple does make certain activities less dangerous, but it's still making access to distractions easier and I think that's a bad thing.

Post reply on HN